Gopinath Mohakuda v. State Of Odisha

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

WPC (OAC) No.859 OF 2012 Gopinath Mahakud .....

Petitioner Mr. A. Routray, Advocate Vs.

State of Odisha & others .....

Opposite parties Mr. M. Balabantaray, S.C.

CORAM:

DR. JUSTICE B.R. SARANGI

ORDER

18.02.2022 Order No.

This matter is taken up by hybrid mode.

2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner.

3. The petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking direction to the opposite parties to regularize his services within a stipulated period in view the judgments of the apex Court in Secretary, State of Karnataka v. Umadevi (2006) 4 SCC 1, State of Karnataka v. M.L. Keshari, 2010 (II) OLR (SC) 982 and Amarkant Rai v. State of Bihar, (2015) 8 SCC 265.

4. In course of hearing, learned counsel for the petitioner stated that the petitioner may be permitted to move a fresh representation raising all the contentions, which have been raised in the writ petition, before the authority, so that the same can be considered in accordance with law keeping in view of ratio decided in Umadevi, M.L. Keshari & Amarkant Rai (supra) and Annexure-6.

5. Considering the limited nature of grievance of the

petitioner, this Court directs the petitioner to file a fresh representation within a period of two weeks from today ventilating his grievances, which have been raised in the writ petition, before the authority. In the event the petitioner files such representation annexing this order and the copies of the aforesaid judgments, the authority shall consider and pass appropriate order keeping in view the ratio decided in Umadevi, M.L. Keshari & Amarkant Rai (supra) and Annexure-6 within a period of three months thereafter.

6. With the aforesaid observation and direction, the writ petition is disposed of.

Alok (DR. B.R. SARANGI) JUDGE